바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology

ISSN : 1229-0653

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.27 No.3
Citation Share

The Effects of Expectation for Payment or Refund on Tax Compliance: Differences in Job, Sex, and Regulatory Focus

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology / Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, (P)1229-0653;
2013, v.27 no.3, pp.155-174
https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2013.27.3.009

(2013). The Effects of Expectation for Payment or Refund on Tax Compliance: Differences in Job, Sex, and Regulatory Focus. Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, 27(3), 155-174, https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2013.27.3.009
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed
PDF Download

Abstract

The present study aimed to investigate the effects of expectation for payment or refund on reference points and tax compliance when people faced additional tax payment. In addition, it was examined if the effects of expectation were different according to jobs (the employed vs. the self-employed) and individual differences such as sex and regulatory focus affected tax compliance. Hypothetical scenarios were provided presenting additional payment situations with different manipulations of expectation and tax compliance was measured. The results showed that tax compliance was different depending on jobs. In case of the employed, when there was no expectation, tax compliance was higher in the refund condition than in the payment condition, replicating the withholding phenomenon. When there was expectation, however, tax compliance was higher in the payment condition than in the refund condition, suggesting that the expected asset position was used as reference points. In case of the self-employed, the manipulations of expectation did not affect tax compliance. When sex and regulatory focus were analyzed together in each job category, the employed were affected more by promotion focus, whereas the self-employed were affected more by prevention focus and the self-employed showed more complex interactions among sex, regulatory focus, and expectation. Finally, theoretical and practical implications were discussed.

keywords
납세순응도, 기대, 준거점, 조절초점, tax compliance, expectation, reference point, regulatory focus

Reference

1.

박명호, 전병힐, 조명환 (2011). 납세순응행위의 결정요인 분석: 실험적 접근. 한국조세연구원 연구보고서 11-07.

2.

박주철, 이남우 (2003). 소득원천이 세율과 납세순응과의 관계에 미치는 영향에 관한 실험연구. 세무학연구, 20, 109-132.

3.

박주철, 이남우 (2008). 과세공평성 지각이 납세순응에 미치는 영향. 세무와 회계저널, 9, 123-144.

4.

유진협 (2001). 조절초점이 심리적 임파워먼트에 미치는 조절변수로서의 영향. 연세대학교 대학원 석사학위논문.

5.

정찬웅 (1996). 납세자의 소득신고 수준결정에 관한 실험실 연구. 회계학연구, 21, 19-44.

6.

현진권, 박창균, 강병민 (2002). 실험자료를 사용한 납세순응행위의 실증분석. 세무학연구, 18, 59-80.

7.

Allingham, M., G., & Sandmo, A. (1972). Income tax evasion: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Public Economics, 1, 323-338.

8.

Alm, J. (1988). Uncertain tax policies, individual behavior, and welfare. American Economic Review, 78, 237-245.

9.

Baldry, J. C. (1987). Income tax evasion and the tax schedule: Some experimental results. Public Finance, 42, 357-383.

10.

Chang, O. H., Nichols, D. R., & Schultz, J. J. (1987). Taxpayer attitudes toward tax audit risk. Journal of Economic psychology, 8, 299-309.

11.

Chang, O. H., & Schultz, J. J. (1990). The income tax withholding phenomenon: Evidence from TCMP data. The Journal of the American Taxation Association, 12, 88-93.

12.

Clotfelter, C. (1983). Tax evasion and tax rates: An analysis of individual returns. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 65, 363-373.

13.

Copeland, P. V., & Cuccia, A. D. (2002). Multiple determinants of framing referents in tax reporting and compliance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 88, 499-526.

14.

Eriksen, K., & Fallan, L. (1996). Tax knowledge and attitudes towards taxation; A report on a quasi-experiment. Journal of Economic Psychology, 17, 387-402.

15.

Hasseldine, J., & Hite, P. A. (2003). Framing, gender, and tax compliance. Journal of Economic Psychology, 24, 517-533.

16.

Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280-1300.

17.

Higgins, E. T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 30, pp.1-46). New York: Academic Press.

18.

Holler, M., Hoelzl, E., Kirchler, E., Leder, S., & Mannetti, L. (2008). Framing of information on the use of public finances, regulatory fit of recipients and tax compliance. Journal of Economic Psychology, 29, 597-611.

19.

Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291.

20.

Kirchler, E., & Maciejovsky, B. (2001). Tax compliance within the context of gain and loss situations, expected and current asset position, and profession. Journal of Economic Psychology, 22, 173-194.

21.

Lewis, A., Carrera, S., Cullis, J., & Jones, P. (2009). Individual, cognitive and cultural differences in tax compliance: UK and Italy compared. Journal of Economic Psychology, 30, 431-445.

22.

Sandmo, A. (1981). Income tax evasion, labor supply, and the equity-efficiency tradeoff. Journal of Public Economics, 16, 265-288.

23.

Schepanski, A., & Shearer, T. (1995). A prospect theory account of the income tax withholding phenomenon. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 63, 174-186.

24.

Simon, H. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological Review, 63, 129-138.

25.

Song, Y. D., & Yarbrough, T. E. (1978). Tax ethics and taxpayer attitudes: A survey. Public. Administration Review, 38, 442-452.

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology

e-Submission OA Policy